Not angry, just... Eh... I don't know the right word in English... Futile? Yes, that would work... Like what I did was futile...
Also I only used the red 'cause you did... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)
Now, I have to say, I don't think it makes sense that only sight provides this link, but then, I don't think creating fire or walls out of nothing makes sense...
That is the way it works...
At least it makes more sense that D&D spellcasting...

Let's do it again sometimes... (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

What was wrong with D&D spell casting? Sure the idea that a wizard could not create a healing spell was a bit wacked, but... never mind... *must remember this is shadowrun and not D&D*

Yea, I'd like confirmation on this too.

Wow, I was kind of hoping that little flame war was over when I posted...

...apparently not.

>Hacks thread and uses Control 6 to get it back on topic<





While that's true, I'd say that everybody can benefit from three meat initiative passes--especially mages. Casting spells takes longer than firing a gun, so you're already getting to do less per pass than your gunslingin' buddies. Granted, spells can often pack a higher DV than most firearms, (if you know what you're doing) but I'd say being able to cast three force 5 spells in the same time it'd take you to cast one force 6 is a good trade-up. Plus, it gives you some spare initiative passes for when you need to go full defense to save your hide from that vatjob sammie who also has three initiative passes.

If you want to get munchkinny about it, a lost point of esscence/magic costs you 1 point on tests, sustaining Increase Relfexes costs you two and risks drain. I'm not sure if focuses are cheaper than 'ware in this case--but 'ware can't be stolen.

As for Kitsune's comment, I thought the whole point of this thread was in breaking from those kind of stereotypes. For the guy I was working on, he really was more of a street thug than a hacker. The technomancer angle was the hook that set him apart--he had just enough technical mojo to make his job easier. This isn't somebody who'd be spending his life in the matrix, crashing icons and scoring paydata. And more importantly, it represented the driving conflict behind the character: Regardless of his desires, the corps said "do this" and forced a decision that limited his options and all but severed his link to the ressonance.

I went ahead and remade the character as a mundane with an implanted commlink--but he looses a lot of his depth that way. Anybody can be some pissed-off punk with 'ware.

I fully agree, mages need more passes...
Technomancers are not mages...
Having never played a TM, these are just thing I decided on by observing, but 1 resonance seems to mean a lot more to a TM than 1 magic does to a Mage...

Talk to your GM about taking techno-geasa. Some of the stronger conditional ones might work; like "only at night" or "pacifist", "only while operating in three nodes", even things like "within 24 hours of a chemical cocktail".

I have to say that I prefer playing the low rolling mage with around 1 IP per turn. That makes those guys dropping by my manabolt rather satisfying than being adressed by my fellow players as "the guy who stacks up quite the body count as we have to shoot those ol' dirty bastards around 2 or 3 times and he just stares at 'em and all of a sudden their friggin heads go poof!".

If a few of us were angry, we'd be temp-banned right now. As it was, we're just getting frustrated. Because time and again people tried to explain one of the core rules of the game to you -- phrasing it as many different ways as we could, to aid in comprehenson -- and you essentially replied with "LA LA LA LA LA LA LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU! LET'S ASK SYNNER INSTEAD OF JUST READING THE RULEBOOK! LA LA LA LA LA LA!" and that shit gets old real quick, man.

In the future, if five or six people are all telling you that you're misinterpreting a rule, and providing you with page numbers and quotes and everything else that goes with it, maybe you should open your head to the fact that maybe you're the one that's wrong. Then take a look at the rulebook, because -- trust me -- that's where game developers write down their opinions on the rules.

Don't be "that guy" that always runs and gets a grown-up instead of just listening to everyone else and looking in the book, man. No one likes that guy, and that guy isn't a lot of fun to be around on a message board. Essentially, your stubborness on the issue (until Synner speaks up) is you telling everyone else on the forum that their opinions and knowledge are worthless, there's no point in talking to them, and you're not going to listen to anyone but Synner.

Frustrated!
Thank you, that's the word I couldn't think of in English...
Which is actually pretty stupid since it is almost the same word in my native language...

I think that with a way the rules were written my point of view was VERY valid. I did read the rulebook... and that's why I asked the question. As for ignoring you and going:

We had a discussion, and since tempers were flaring, I turned to the person who part of the team who wrote the game. I did this to get past the point of contention.



And maybe sometimes the person asking the question is right. Just because there are a lot of people saying the same thing does not always mean that they are right. I could use a real world example, but I don't want to invoke a version of Nazi netiquette clause.




Excuse me Critias, I was presenting my viewpoint, you and the others presented your viewpoints. My arguements were valid. Are you saying that if you and 5 other people all agree on something that no one can argue with you and try to present an opposing viewpoint? That everyone who disagrees with you and your group are wrong? If so then... that's sad. Oh, and by the way I do listen, I just think that I brought up valid arguements.

Anyways, I think that this arguement has gone on long enough, I am bowing out before the embers get any hotter.

It cracks me up that you're willing to put more effort into a traditional line-for-line tit-for-tat debate about whether or not you're a tool for arguing than you were into your original arguments. Where once you blithely ignored whole sections of people's posts (wherein they tried to, with increasing frustration, explain to you again and again how you were wrong and support it with the rules), all of a sudden now you've got a level of attention to detail that would make the combined crews of CSI Las Vegas and Miami's heads spin.

I'm trying to explain to you why folks got frustrated with arguing with you, and you're responding by arguing with me. Man. Chivalry might be a bloated corpse lying in a gutter somewhere, but don't let anyone ever tell you irony is dead, too.

Excuse me? Since the VERY beginning of this thread I have done line by line responses to people.

Anyways, let's just agree to disagree and get off this subject. I was wrong for taking as far as I did, and you were wrong for wanting to continue this. Let's just drop it, please.

As for the OP, I'm curious as to the lack of low-light and eyelights. Seems to me those might be more important than vision mag (are there spell ranges in SR4?), flare comp, which can be gotten as a mod for glasses, and maybe a level of vision enhancement.

The point is that this is not an 'Ask the developers' forum, where all the other posters besides Rob and Synner are superfluous. This is an independently-run Shadowrun community, where the developers occasionally drop by and mingle, but are under no obligation to even read, let alone respond to your posts. When you disregard every other respondent to your query and instead cry for the Teacher, you give the impression that we are all irrelevant, and that you expect the Powers-that-Be to be at your beck and call.

This is Dumpshock! It is not the official Catalyst forums.

I never said that. I never even implied that. I did say that Synner and crew are The Final Word when it came to rules interpretation. I argued my position and people responded. There was a back and forth discussion and it was getting heated. I then punted this question to Synner.

OK, I'm now officially asking for this to please be dropped. I don't want this to continue, and I think that everyone else wants this to end as well.

Lots of people have suggested cybereyes, and at 0.4 E for R4 alphas, you can get them pretty much completely tricked out...
Low-light, Thermo, Flare Comp, Vision Mag and Vision Enhance and you still have room for retina duplication...
Cybereyes rule really...
And if you get the ones you can pop out, you have a good party gimmick too...

EDIT: additionally, I usually take more bio than cyber, lowering this to 0.2 E, just FYI...

I think Dumpshock at least qualifies as "semi-official". Didn't someone from catalyst post here that there are no official Shadowrun forums since there's dumpshock?

Well, Dumpshock is as close as it gets to being semi-official, but ...

But that doesn't mean people only come here, or should only come here, to engage in discussions with the developers. That's not even how most official forums work. And if these were official forums, they'd be an awful lot more boring, an awful lot more clean, and full of an awful lot more moderation and less back-talk.

And no one wants that.

Fuck yeah! (IMG:style_emoticons/default/nyahnyah.gif)

I would say that instead of level 4 eyes, you can get level 3 eyes and level 1 ears... or if you're squeezed on Essence, go with level 2 eyes and level 1 ears. That would have the same Essence impact as level 4 eyes alone. With level 2 eyes you can have the following: Flare Comp, Low Light, Thermo, Vision Mag, Vision Enhancement (level 1). Or you can drop low light and upgrade the vision enhancement to level 3. The low light can go into a monocle with a smartlink.

Sure you don't have smartlink (unless you have my monocle setup), but if you're a mage... how often are you drawing your gun?

Note: this is a different tact from my previous stance... trying to look at this from different ways.

Finally, I want to ask everyone this: If you have a level 1 reflex booster (Wired, Synaptic Booster, or Move-By-Wire), how would a sustained Improve Reflexes spell work? Would it add it's level to your already boosted reflexes or would it not stack (and page numbers please so I can read it myself... thanks in advance)?

Which was kinda my whole point. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

It works parallel to each other, as I understand it...
Wired 1 would mean the spell would need 3 hits to give any improvement...
They definately do not stack and it says so in the desctiption of wired, booster, MbW and Imp Ref...

Also, why the ears?

I know. I was backin' you up, homes! *flashes Ancients gang signs* Word, us Keebs got's'ta stick together, yo! Where my Keeb-lah's at, where my Keeb-lah's at? *strikes a pose*

WRT increasing already boosted reflexes... I thought those "can't be boosted further" were for other bio/cyberware augmentations and not magic. I do remember the Increase Augmented Reflexes spell in second edition.

Why the ears? Here's my take: With ears level 1 you can have increased sensitivity (for detecting those pesky ultrasound sensors), spatial recognizer (knowing where the bad guys are before they're in your face), damper (when you're taking on those beasties with sonic attacks), sound link (realllllly minor bonus), and sound recorder (much more serious bonus) for really cheap.

Question: With cybereyes/cyberears can you use the software listed on pages 60 & 61 of Arsenal? I mean you do have trid cams for eyes and microphones for ears. I am curious about everyone's take on this.